Originally published at: Supreme Court Just Okayed One Neat Trick to Illegally Gerrymander Your State - TPM – Talking Points Memo
The Supreme Court was simply hamstrung, Justice Samuel Alito wrote, unable to knock down Texas’ hyper-partisan, likely racial gerrymander because the election it would govern is so close. Said election, though, is a whopping 11 months away. Yet that near year of time — plus a March primary, which Texas could delay — counts as…
3 Likes
Just so we have this right wing Nazi horseshit straight.
Gerrymandering a state’s districts on the eve of an election is fine. But appointing a Supreme Court justice a year before an election is “too close” and the voters must decide.
Folks, this bullshit is on us. At this point we’re not being bent over, we’re happily bending over for them and asking for it. When the fuck are we going to fight back. And please, please, please don’t give me the bullshit that “we can’t do anything.” That’s fucking loser talk and you may as well STFU. Did the French roll over for the Nazis during the occupation? Did the Vietnamese just let us roll all over them? No. But Jesus, if you’re looking for a limp dick, look no further than your nearest Democrat.
15 Likes
It looks like Moscow Mitch is now writing the Supreme Court’s decisions.
13 Likes
Ok, let me review the details here. So this gerrymandering occurred far enough away from the election that it was taken to court, have an appeal all the way to SCOTUS, where SCOTUS rules almost a year away from the election.
But that is too close to the election. Right.
Oh, sorry, I mean far rightttt…
26 Likes
This is the Roberts Court, not the Supreme Court. Corrupt and partisan, the Roberts Court is a disgrace. Make him own it.
33 Likes
I get Biden’s point when faced with this. You have to trust the judicial system, but we’re so far gone that Dems need to forget about preserving norms and start attacking SCOTUS credibility. It sets the stage for reform if given power again, and gets ahead of Rs just doing it in response to any change (because they will, and they’ll go further). People’s trust in the court is gone either way, you might as well try and control the narrative.
28 Likes
The Supreme Court has declared that the United States exists in a state known as Schrödinger’s election: it is simultaneously too soon and too late to make any laws relating to congressional districts or voting, unless you’re a Republican.
36 Likes
The main takeaway is that they’ve stopped even caring how blatant the Calvinball appears. The mask is fully off and that’s something we can eventually use if we muster the will to do so.
30 Likes
Jeez - the court’s majority could at least flatter us by trying to be subtle.
31 Likes
So keeping congressional district maps as they are is somehow confusing to the Voters, but adopting completely different maps just before an election isn’t.
Fuckers.
34 Likes
The relevant election date has to be the primary? Once candidates are chosen, how can the maps be redrawn? Still doesn’t mean six months to March is ‘too close’.
6 Likes
They should just sign their decisions ‘according to the rules of Calvinball’.
14 Likes
- Alito is full of shit (nothing new there)
- This may come back to bite those fuckers; a partisan gerrymander depends upon spreading the same number of partisan voters over a number of districts. Given the poor performance of Republicans in recent elections, it may be too thin
22 Likes
Will the SCOTUS use similar convoluted, unconstitutional, and illegal logic for the Trump tariff issue? Pathetic.
10 Likes
SCOTUS’s interpretation of “how close is too close to an election?” will depend on the state. Last minute racial gerrymanders following SCOTUS’s throwing out of Section 2 of the VRA will be allowed while California’s gerrymander will be thrown out.
15 Likes
No one, but no one, is considering the idea that when California and the other blue States present their maps, those maps will be declared null and void by the same court that said Texas was ok. You know it will happen, no debate.
As someone said above, subtlety is not in this court’s wheelhouse.
23 Likes
Given that states control voting, by what authority does the Supreme Court jump in to tell states how to do it?
4 Likes
Because they were dragged into the discussion by the GQP. Don’t ask a question of the court if you’re expecting an answer that doesn’t favor you, apparently.
6 Likes